I guess it had to be asked - are some lives worth more than others?

[Taverner]

If so who gets to make that determination



If you ask me, NO - this is antithetical to the principle of egalitarianism.

And anyone who does NOT believe in egalitarianism, is in the wrong fucking site.

[LittleBlue]

1. Of course not

Who has suggested this?

[Taverner]

2. Check out the Gungeon

Lots of folks think their lives are worth more than others

[etherealtruth]

17. They have a lot of delusional thoughts

Sadly, they feel the need to express them here

[hrmjustin]

26. I don't like reading the gungeon because it rots your brains, and I need whatever bain cells

I have left.

[oldhippie]

33. Indeed ....

... look what it's done to the OP.

(I'm sorry, I just couldn't pass that opportunity up. Thanks for the set up. )

[hrmjustin]

34. Your welcome.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

63. not many

tis true.

[hrmjustin]

64. Are you saying I have not many brain cells.

[Bake]

27. I guess I'm confused ...

Is this a gun thread or a Syria thread?

If it's a gun thread, and if someone attacks me or my family, is my life or my family's worth more than the attacker's? To me, yes. In the larger scheme of things, maybe not, but our are certainly not worth less and I am under no obligation to let the attacker take my/our lives. So bottom line, if I can defend myself and my family, you're damn right I will.

If it's a Syria thread, well, yeah that's a mess over there. Are American lives worth more than Syrians' lives? No, but we can't save everyone. And it gets more complicated from there, so I'm glad we haven't gone to war with Syria so far.



Bake

[rrneck]

62. You need to start coughing up some links. nt

[Igel]

3. Yes.

If it comes down to letting my son die or two strangers die--let's say there's an accident and I can save just my kid or be able to save two others--the two others are toast. No regrets.


I'm also not going to condemn somebody who fails to give his life so that two or more others could live. Or, in the case of somebody who dies to save one other, to judge him a fool because his life was just as good as somebody else's. It's up to them and not some neutered principle to make that decision for such people.

Consider also the Secret Service. Most would take a bullet and die to protect Obama, so you could easily get 3 or more killed to protect him. If Obama's life is just the same as anybody else's, he's obligated to take a bullet to protect his SS agents if it came down to that. I think that would be wrong. Some lives are more important than others.

[treestar]

51. I think you hit the nail on the head

We will all make judgments like that, which may not agree, but no one will really consider all equal, except perhaps in the Declaration of Independence sense, where all have the equal rights before the law. But even the law cannot be perfectly neutral. It involves other people judging what the evidence is of what we did.

There is a lot of DU discussion about how people will value American lives over others, which happens too. The whole debate over Hiroshima had some of those issues in it. We were willing as a nation to kill many Japanese people, including women and children, in the name of saving Americans. As such we were putting more value on our lives.

[furious]

4. As I told you in the other thread you started,

the only time a life is worth less than mine is if someone is coming after me or my family or a member of the public that's being threatened with grave bodily harm by another, other than that, every life is equal to another, but is one life worth saving more than another? Depends upon the circumstances.

[Throd]

5. I think your life is worth more than a murderous scumbag like Richard Ramirez, so my answer is yes.

[Dr. Strange]

6. I'd say the answer is obviously yes.

Otherwise, why do cops have guns?

[furious]

7. To protect ourselves and the general public.

So, in our capacity, our lives and those of the public are more important than those that seek to do us and the public harm.

[Whiskeytide]

8. Its not that simple...

...And I don't understand the point of your question. Philosophically, all life is equal. But, in given circumstances, and depending upon your relationship to the parties involved and your perception of the situation, of course you would value the life of one person over another.

[cali]

47. precisely. I really have contempt for this kind of sophomoric garbage.

[WonderGrunion]

9. The life of a child rapist is certainly worth less

Their ability to destroy multiple lives as they live their life may make their life a "negative value" life. It actually detracts from the value of society.

[Taverner]

10. I disagree

We are all worth the same

Yes, the child rapist has a right to corrective psychiatry, which has been growing in leaps and bounds lately

Yes, the child has a right to redress with punitive damages (basically, the right amount of $$$)

And yes, any one of us has the right to stop it

But not with lethal means

[uppityperson]

14. So the rapist gets to rape and then get psych help. The child gets to be raped and then get money

for being raped? And if the only way I can stop a rapist from raping a child is to kill him, I should not do that because, after all, the kid will get "the right amount of $$$"?

[pintobean]

20. Simple truths can be elusive for some.

I believe the OP tries to come across as a deep thinker. I'm not buying.

[Taverner]

21. Oh I didn't say there wouldn't be punitive damages

There should be - in all that deserves punitive damages

Fines and jail time

But while we have that person, we should try to prevent them from doing it again

Not killing them

[uppityperson]

36. I am confused. "any one of us has the right to stop it, but not by lethal means" and the raped child

has a right to getting paid for being raped. But no one should be able to stop a child from getting raped "by lethal means"? And now you say "while we have that person...not killing them". Are you meaning do not kill someone while they are raping a child or after as punishment?

You wrote

Yes, the child rapist has a right to corrective psychiatry, which has been growing in leaps and bounds lately

Yes, the child has a right to redress with punitive damages (basically, the right amount of $$$)

And yes, any one of us has the right to stop it

But not with lethal means

[Taverner]

37. Is raping a child worth death?

I say no

There should be a wide array of punishments

But death should not be one of them

[uppityperson]

38. And if killing someone is the only way to stop someone from raping a child?

You seem to be talking now punishment AFTER a rape. I am talking about STOPPING a rape.

[TheKentuckian]

18. By any means. Also, no one is required to assign greater worth to an assailant's life than their own

which seems to be your aim but there is nothing egalitarian about such.
You are free to spend your blood as you see fit but no one is required to go along with your suicide wish to be decent folks.

Your arguments also fail to seem credible to me, I suspect when the rubber hits the road, you'll follow your survival instinct and suddenly will be less concerned about the equality of worth of life and do whatever it takes to keep yours and if you don't then you are a evolutionary dead end and a fool in my eyes but I have to respect your self determination and your right to live and die as you see fit.

Who decides is the stupid motherfucker committing suicide by assault, it is that person that decided to put the worth of their life up against mine. The person defending themselves had no choice of peaceably going about their business.

Don't start nothing, won't be nothing means the attacker is the one who decided their life is worth less not the defender.

[Taverner]

19. That is my nonviolent stance

If you disagree, I understand, but I will not follow

I will protect my family, but I will not kill unless there is no other option

And I will ALWAYS look for another option

Go watch Breaking Bad, Season 1, when Walter White has his first kill.

He makes a pro/con list - it's kind of funny.

------------------------

I don't care, I do not want to be a killer.

I will never, if I have my way .

[Eleanors38]

31. Gandhi endorses non-violent means to stop attacks.

but he didn't object to violent means, either. He only objected to passively letting the attack transpire.

[blueridge3210]

32. You just decided

That the assailant's life is worth less when you decide there is no other option but to kill in defense of a family member. That is the fundamental flaw in your OP. Clearly some lives are worth less than others in certain circumstances; that is what allows the use of deadly force in self defense. To rule otherwise would be folly, as it places the life of a violent assailent on the same level as the intended victim.

[cali]

48. absolute fucking sickening garbage.

multiple

[surrealAmerican]

11. I like to think that ...

... if I were terminally ill, I would die to save a child's life. Everybody dies eventually. The time we have left may very well be weighed against the time someone else may have.

[Taverner]

22. That is your personal choice

It should not be forced

[The2ndWheel]

12. Worth is a subjective term

[FarCenter]

13. Yes -- juries and judges make determinations of amounts to compensate survivors.

It is not the same for all cases.

[The Straight Story]

15. Depends on how you define 'worth' it is a little subjective (nt)

[LostOne4Ever]

16. I agree with you

No one life is worth more than another.

When one starts thinking that, it allows for horrible atrocities to become possible.

[Taverner]

28. +100

[cali]

45. Fucking ridiculous- unless you're talking on some metaphysical level

first of all, we can't help that we value the lives of our loved ones more than the lives of strangers. Secondly, I have no problem saying that the life of a doctor with Doctors without borders saving lives in a disaster or war zone is of more value than that of the terrorists who just killed over 60 people in Kenya or that the life of a 5 year old is "worth more" than the life of a 90 year old on life support.

Give me a fucking break.

[LostOne4Ever]

54. Please don't misunderstand me

I am not saying the value of their characters are the same, but that I feel the value of lives are the same. These are not the same thing to me and that is not what I am trying to arguing.

That said, valuing the lives of one's own family over others has allowed people to ruin the lives of complete strangers for their families comfort. Fear that something might jeopardize the lifestyle of one's family can and probably has convinced many people to support unjust wars.

I love my family dearly, but as a person of conscience I can not say that their lives are more valuable than someone I don't know. What if the family I just doomed to death was one that spent every waking moment helping others? Caring for the disabled and poor?

Even the life of that terrorist, what if he repented and went on to lead to the end of Al Queda and saved thousands upon thousands? What if that 5 year old would have gone on to be a serial killer? While the 90 year old would have inspired one of his/her grandchildren to become a scientist who cures cancer? Odds are that the child would help more people, but we don't know. Also, I think that one must also consider the people who the 90 year old has influenced over their long life and who care about him/her

Above you said you value the lives of your family more than strangers. What if the 90 year old was a direct family member you loved deeply? A mother or grandfather or sibling. Would you still value the 5 year old more? Or would you now value the 90 year old more? Seems like the answer could easily change depending on the who and when.

I don't know the future, and I am not saying that one should not be responsible for their actions. But I do know that many people have been unjustly murdered because someone did not value the life of others. As I said in my previous post, I believe that once someone is dead that is that. You will never see them again. Because of that the life of all people is very very precious to me. That is part of the reason I oppose the death penalty and feel war should be a very last resort.

I am sorry you find my views offensive. I know you and Nuclear Unicorn are very intelligent posters and are trying to show the error in my type of thinking and are offended by the thought that I am saying a criminal should be considered equal to doctor. I hear what you are saying, but respectfully disagree. I am not saying their characters are equal, just that the value of them being living entities is equal. I also feel that once society says one life if more valuable than another it put in place the circumstances needed to commit horrible horrible tragedies and I reject that.

Again, my apologies for offending you.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

46. What would it be worth to

To end this?



I suppose the corollary would be -- if you think the people who did this are of equal value to the people they victimized then you are not worth any more than the people who did this.

[LostOne4Ever]

49. It would be worth the world to save even one of them

The people who did that were able to do it because they thought those peoples lives were not worth it. They lost sight of the humanity of their victims.

The way to fight that does not mean that we should fall into the same type of thinking that allowed them to do that. It means rejecting it and standing against it. This does not mean that we don't take punitive measures, or condemn their actions but rather reject the very thinking to led to that outcome. Further, don't confuse value of character and value of life. They are not the same thing.

When someone dies, they don't come back. That is the end. Because of this life is incredibly precious.

Let me ask you one question. Do you really think that had the people who did this believed as I do, would this have happened? If your answer is anything OTHER THAN "no" then you didn't understand a word of what I said. Let me quote myself

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]LostOne4Ever[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]When one starts thinking that, it allows for horrible atrocities to become possible.

I didn't type that sentence simply cause I thought it sounded good. I find it sad that you think that a person who believes in philosophy that would have prevented those deaths from happening is in anyway on par with those who murdered those innocent people.

We are both allies in trying to stop things like that from happening, though we go about it in different ways. We should respect that, and each other rather than throwing out insults because someone said something you don't like. I am paying you that courtesy, I ask that you do the same.

I would like close by reminding you the words of Nietzsche:

[div class="excerpt" style="margin-left:1em; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-radius:0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

55. "had the people who did this believed as I do, would this have happened?"

The people who did that WANTED to do it. They didn't have to, they chose to do it. Not seeing the humanity of their victims was a by-product of what they wanted, not the cause of it.

[LostOne4Ever]

56. In other words

No, they wouldn't have.

They would not have WANTED to do it if they saw those lives as valuable as their own.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

57. That's a tautological statement.

But the reality is, you are incapable of changing what they want. You can sermonize them all day long, extoling the virtues of our shared humanity and you are more than likely going to end up just another skull in the pile.

[LostOne4Ever]

58. Yes its tautological

Its based on definitions, so it follows that it is going to always be true.

Yes, I can't change what they want. Yes, If I tried to talk them out of it I would be another skull. That is because they don't have the same reverence for life I have.

If anything it shows the stark difference in thought and ideology between myself and them.

So how does it in anyway follow that I am in anyway, shape, or form am on par with them? Further, how does that go against any of my assertions?

I mean no disrespect, but I am not seeing the point you are trying to make in post 57.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

59. The OP asks, "Are some lives worth more than others."

I answer "Yes. Yes, some lives are worth more than others."

innocent victim's life > murderer's life

murderer's life < innocent victim's life



For anyone to say, "All lives are equal" is to say

innocent victim's life = murderer's life

murderer's life = innocent victim's life


Without seeming too presumptuous I would say

your life = innocent victim's life

But if you were to insist

innocent victim's life = murderer's life

murderer's life = innocent victim's life

then

your life = murderer's life

[BOG PERSON]

23. yes?

[PlanetaryOrbit]

24. I suppose from a purely practical standpoint, some might be.

The life of a 25-year old person with an IQ of 200, who could potentially be the next Edison or Einstein, could by some logical argument be worth more than the life of an 80-year old mentally handicapped person who has an IQ of 50 and is asleep for most of the day.



But from a moral and theological standpoint, I think all lives are equally valuable.

[yawnmaster]

25. lives themselves, no - same worth. What the lives represent, on the other hand...

yes there are different worths.
Of course, that worth is relative, based on the situation, who is judging, and what the comparison is against.
It is not as simple as a simple question.

[oldhippie]

29. Yes ....

I am comfortable making that determination.

I do not recognize your authority to tell me what sites I may visit.

[Eleanors38]

30. That question is best asked of a violent attacker. nt

[Yo_Mama]

35. When the chips are down, yes, and there is nothing unegalitarian about making the choice.

Easiest example - I walk out of the house one morning with my kid, only to be confronted by a raving maniac who runs toward us brandishing a knife, screaming that he is going to kill us. Fortunately, we are headed to Little League, so I swing the bat in my hand and bonk the guy out, which certainly poses the risk of death or severe injury to him. After the threat has been removed, I may reflect sadly on the fact that the guy was probably just insane, but when I have to chose, I choose the kid's life and mine over his.

There is nothing that contradicts egalitarianism in the above example - to say that I shouldn't bonk is to say that the life of the knife-brandisher is somehow worth more than my life or the kid's life or even both.

The reality is that sometimes life will force us to choose who to save, and when it does then we normally choose first those closest to us (either emotionally or physically), and second the most vulnerable (assuming that the others have a better chance to save themselves), and last those with the most life left (like if you have to choose between grabbing a little kid or an aged grandparent out of a car wreck, you'll go for the kid first).

It would be wonderful if life never forced us to choose, but sometimes it does. It does in health care systems, in violent situations and in situations in which there are limited resources to intervene. I don't think that we should ever decide some lives are not worth saving because of inconvenience, but sometimes life puts us in a situation in which we must choose between lives.

[rl6214]

39. Absolutely, you take someone like that Castro guy that held those women and

Abused them, yeah, some lives are worth more than others.

[Demo_Chris]

40. Of course. My life and the lives of those I care for personally...

Are worth infinitely more to me than the life of some stranger.

[FUMCSDLCBDPOS]

41. Yes and I don't like it but it is just reality in America and the world today.

As for who makes the decision why it is OUR Elected leaders or Elected, Appointed or Self Appointed leaders in other countries.

[cali]

42. that's actually not a simple question. At fucking all.

It all depends on perspective. I have little use of simplistic moralistic junk. And yes, I consider your post to be that.

Is my son's life worth more to me than yours? Yep. sorry. And I'll fucking wager that I'm hardly the only one who values the lives of their loved ones over others.

On a meta level, it may be a different story, but on the level of nitty gritty everyday life...

The life of a 90 year old on life support or the life of a 5 year old? which is "worth" more?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

43. Let us know

when you think the lives of those being preyed upon aren't worth less than the lives of the predators destroying them. A life without self-determination is barely a life. That's why we have democracy. That's why we outlaw slavery.

Yet, there are those who would rob, rape and murder but apparently you think they are allowed to determine what they want to do at the expense of the right to self-determination of their victims but the victims are not entitled to protect themselves.

[Decaffeinated]

44. We all decide the value of individual lives...

... based on what we know about a person or value about them or visa versa.

Once you head out beyond the individual is when it gets sticky...

[rrneck]

50. No. What makes you think it had to be asked? nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

61. his post #2 in this thread and all is revealed ...

we are less than human is the message I am receiving and he is transmitting.

[BlueJazz]

52. Are some lives worth more than others? People and Animals Yes. Cockroaches Yes but with exceptions

[dkf]

53. Of course your life is worth more than other lives. That's built in to us.

How can anything survive if there is no need to put oneself above others. Maternal and Paternal instincts are also key.

You can only get so far from the instincts that have allowed a species to thrive. I would say that looking at how humans have taken over everything and how little regard we have for other species in general this instinct is strongest in we humans.

Is empathy stronger than self preservation? I doubt it.

[WinkyDink]

60. Maybe "All men are created equal," but what they do afterwards is a factor in your query.